This morning I stated that this was an important show for Joe Scarborough. There is a definite connection between the show and Weiner but Joe Scarborough is very familiar with Twitter and would understand the potential problems with Rep. Weiner’s story.

Yet his own dismissal of Andrew Breitbart and association with people such as Joan Walsh of Salon who railed about the Weiner business being all about conservatives attacking teenage girls, and the Huffington Post who confined the story to the NY section, transformed any confrontation with Weiner from simple reporting to act of courage. It would be standing against the people he hangs with at parties and events. It is the type of thing that would make the “no labels” crowd uncomfortable.

Confronted with this choice, #weinergate was not covered in any segment, and his name was mentioned only in passing about “hacking” in general. It didn’t even make the “news you can’t use” segment. (Can you imagine this happening if the congressman in question was Paul Ryan?). No coverage of the lawyering up, no coverage of the alleged hacker offering to submit to investigations and no coverage of Rep Weiner choosing to not answer questions. Nothing.

Normally there would be no damage as only Fox would cover the story and their niche market would never hear about it. Unfortunately for Joe and Company CNN decided no act in a very atypical way for an MSM network.

Congressman Weiner was, to the surprise of even Andrew Breitbart, confronted by a CNN apparently deciding this was a job they would not outsource to Fox (when you are in 3rd place you apparently try harder). The result was classic TV.

The media stars of the left were since the movie all the president’s men, brought up on drams of such confrontations all their lives. All those dreams involved Republicans, but lo and behold when a democrat is the subject it’s still great TV. CNN reporters will look at this and say: Why not me?

This is a disaster for MSNBC. Any MSNBC host this evening who wants to report on this has to show the CNN clip and the left of center viewers who would refuse to turn to FOX to see the story have no such qualms about watching CNN.

Tomorrow morning when this clip is shown on Morning Joe viewers will be wondering why they didn’t hear about this issue on the show. They will remember how many times Congressman Weiner has appeared on the show and will be amazed that they are hearing about this after the fact.

This is an embarrassment and a self-inflicted wound to the credibility of his show.

Why do I care? Two reasons:

1. Morning Joe is the only show on MSNBC that has the possibility of the entry of conservative opinions into their audience. Its fall would likely cause its replacement with a totally liberal show appealing the MBNBC’s niche Market.

2. I genuinely like these people. I’ve met Willie on one occasion and Mike Barnicle on several, they are nice regular guys. The type you would have a beer with and could talk straight with. I suspect Joe and Mika are too. Any parent who sees how Mika reacts around children or sees how she treats her father on the air can’t help but like her. Plus Joe once paid me a complement that was passed on through a 3rd party that was very important to me at the time and an American of Sicilian origin doesn’t forget a favor.

This story is what we call “news.” No matter how unseemly or inconsequential the story may superficially appear to be, it is entirely legitimate and potentially significant, and it is therefore a dereliction of journalistic duty to ignore or dismiss it.

My appearance on Fox 25 tomorrow precludes me from seeing tomorrow’s show, I sure hope they take what I said to heart but frankly I’m not sanguine.

Update: Poor Joe & Co. John Stewart was all over this. I’d bet real money the only clip they will play if any is the “it’s too big to be him” stuff.

In the New York of the late 1800s, Boss Tweed famously complained about Thomas Nast cartoons: Though many immigrants in the city couldn’t read, even the illiterate could understand “those damn pictures.” Rep. Anthony Weiner and his staff now face a similar problem.

Read the Whole thing

Update: Rush Limbaugh linked to the Post Article today. I think that rates an OMG!

“Landowners and extremists are actively involved against the Christian minority in Punjab,” he told AsiaNews. “Most attacks happen in the central part of the province.” The government, he said, should “take charge of the situation and defend the minority.”

As additional evidence of the prevailing atmosphere of violence, a story came to light involving a 29-year-old Christian woman who was abducted by a Muslim co-worker, roughed up, drugged and gang-raped.

Afshan Sabir is a factory worker and a mother of three. She was assaulted over night on 27 March in an unspecified area near Gojra. When she woke up, she sought help in a state of disorientation. She later tried to file a complaint with the local police station. However, instead of helping the woman, police officers helped the rapists cover their tracks..

and it’s not a unique it appears Monday’s Gospel is in action in Egypt:

The pattern of anti-Christian violence has grown far worse since the bombing of a Coptic church at the beginning of this year. The Salafi and Muslim Brotherhood have taken advantage of the situation since the collapse of the Mubarak regime to persecute Christians with little fear of being held accountable for their actions.

The reason for the anti-Christian riot at St. Mary and St. Abraham Church is simple: The church is recognizably Christian on account of its dome and cross, and in keeping with the long-standing Muslim system of “dhimmitude,” such a public display of the faith of a subjugated religious minority is deemed to be intolerable. In short, what the howling mobs in the street are demanding is that Christians would be “put in their place.”

In northern Nigeria, deadly religious violence occurs with regularity, killing hundreds at a time. Christians in Ethiopia have seen the destruction of 57 churches; thousands of Christians have been displaced, and some have been killed. In Sudan, the government has waged a decades-old war against Christians in southern part of the country. In Egypt, radicals now use the façade of democratic reforms to ramp up their continuing war against Coptic Christians, while the army looks the other way. Christians have lived in Iraq for 1,800 years, but recent violence threatens their very existence as a community. In Pakistan, religious violence and anti-blasphemy laws are used to suppress Christians, while prominent Christian politicians and their defenders are assassinated. In India, religious radicals attack Christian converts, while courts and political assemblies take away their rights. Religious violence against Christians occurs with depressing regularity in Indonesia, while the Chinese government cracks down on Christian churches, especially those that have chosen not to register with the communist government. In many countries around the world, anti-Christian activists have hijacked political processes to codify severe discrimination against Christians, making it illegal to convert to Christianity, while encouraging conversions from Christianity.

If you were to read carefully in the media, it would be easy to compile a much longer list of outrages; many other incidents are never covered in the Western press. There is certainly enough evidence to suggest that there are organized campaigns of terror and death against Christians in Africa and Asia.

And as today’s gospel says it, it’s is being done in the name of God

Groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Al-Qaida in Iraq, the Taliban in Pakistan and Hindu fundamentalists in India (among others) openly admit their actions against Christian populations.

Lets see that Gospel verse again:

the hour is coming when everyone who kills you will think he is offering worship to God. They will do this because they have not known either the Father or me. I have told you this so that when their hour comes you may remember that I told you.John 16:2b-4a

Let’s play a game, if the religions were reversed, if the Christians were the persecutors and Muslims and Hindus were the victims how many specials would we have already seen on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and MSNBC about the intolerance of Christians worldwide? How many Time and Newsweek covers would be dedicated to the “Blood of Christ”?

The truth is the systematic murder and persecutions of Christians worldwide is a story that the MSM has no interest in covering. Those on the left are too invested in the idea of Western Civilization in general and Christianity in particular as a curse and oppressor of the world.

Like this:

Because it will be the first regular show since the Anthony Weiner stuff came out.

Why will it be significant? Well as I said a couple of days ago, Joe Scarborough knows and understands Twitter, there is no possibility that he will not understand the significance of Congressman Weiner interesting choices when it comes to people to follow.

Why do I know this, well as an experiment I decided to go through Joe’s follow list. He follows 392 people and of the entire list there is only a single person that seemed out-of-place, and on further observation it appears that person was also followed by several significant people and groups so I’m just assuming I don’t know her.

In other words from his own pattern of following it is clear that Joe follows the normal pattern of famous people. It is inconceivable to me that he would not find the combination of:

…questionable at the very least, and it would be even odder for Mika to pooh pooh this either.

I’m scheduling this post for 5:45 a.m. so it will be up just before Morning Joe begins. Last week we discovered that the Ed Schultz business was not significant on a show concerning women’s empowerment. Today we will see what is stronger on the Morning Joe set; friendship or Journalistic skepticism. Believe it or not, I’m thinking the latter.
Update: It’s looking like I’m a sucker, so far. As of 6:38 “hacking” was joked about it passing when talking about other stories (“lots of hacking this weekend”). Apparently when it comes to the MSM this is a pattern:

The Huffington Post has finally posted something about this weekend’s evolving #Weinergate Story – but not on the national page, but buried in the much less read New York section.

Well they are late and put it on the NY page but it’s not like they spiked the story over the weekend or something…oh wait:

HuffPost Could Have Run The Story Two Days Ago & Chose Not To

This is the part that HuffPost won’t be thrilled with but I mention it because I think it proves some real bias going on…

After months of not blogging at Huffington Post because of their treatment of Andrew Breitbart, I decided this story was juicy / big enough that I wanted to get it out to the HuffPost audience. After all, Huffington Post had been great about publishing my John Edwards pieces.

So I submitted an article that I thought was good – my Would Your Spouse Buy It? article with an added introduction paragraph to explain the story…and note the date…

After all why would an online blog that wants to get eyeballs want to cover a story involving a national rising political figure in the democratic party and a possible connection rather young women, doesn’t sound like something that would drive traffic to me, does it?

A spokesman for Rep. Anthony Weiner, New York Democrat, told The Daily Caller the Congressman’s team has “retained counsel” and is exploring the “proper next steps” after his official Twitter account posted a picture of a man’s erect penis underneath gray boxer shorts. The internet-driven scandal has come to be known online as “#Weinergate,” a pun on the Congressman’s last name.

I don’t claim to be a law expert if I had a client that wanted advice on what to do if someone hacked my account, the legal conversation I would have would be in two sentences:

“Call the police, that will be $1000.”

Now I’m sure that Mr. Weiner’s counsel not being a fool is going to allow Rep Weiner to pay him big bucks for as long as possible, but rep Weiner’s decision to go this route is going to mean something else to even non-twitter familiar people. It certainly drew a reaction from Stacy McCain.

There are direct questions that Rep Weiner has chosen not to answer at this point. He retaining of a lawyer means that no answers will be forthcoming. This certainly does not bode well in terms of appearances and a media savvy congressman would know this.

B: Taking actions that would cause reasonable people to conclude he is hiding something.

…Congressman Weiner has decided the less damaging action to his future ambitions is the later.

There is every possibility that Anthony Weiner will come out of this with a whole skin so to speak, but this latest action means that it will come at a cost in the minds of voters , apparently he is counting on the MSM to cover this with the same due diligence that they give any potential scandal that doesn’t involve a republican.

…perhaps I’m being too hard on Congressman Weiner. I mean every PSA I’ve ever seen about crimes always urges people that if you are the victim of a crime or see one committed you should immediately call the cops retain counsel to help you consider your options.

I bet the idiot who illegally accessed Palin’s emails wishes he’d picked on Weiner instead. She called the cops but apparently Weiner is more forgiving of being violated.

Yup Rep Weiner is much too sophisticated to merely go after the “hacker” in court like that hick Sarah Palin did.

Update 2: A report on CNN showed Weiner in person claiming it was a hacker and pooh poohing it. That’s important. Strangely enough nobody at CNN thought to ask why the lady in question was being followed by Weiner. As for the continued “distraction” business, I remember hearing something like that back in the late 90’s from another democratic pol who loved the camera.

Update 3: Two days Two instalanches, and I suspect tomorrow will be even bigger!

Like this:

I so didn’t want to wake up typing, I have things to do, Herman Cain is just 2 hours away in New Hampshire, the wife and kids have the day off and I still don’t know where in NE Sarah Palin is going to be and I have two sample ads to write for a potential customer of the radio show.

Not to mention normal Memorial Day stuff.

And yet the Weiner case continues to beckon with developments that are not at all favorable to our friends on the left. So here I am back at the keyboard after mass trying to get an update in before the Memorial Day observance.

The young lady in question put out a statement yesterday that you will find at the New York Daily News, in it she makes some charges concerning a person on Twitter “harassed” her:

The account that these tweets were sent from was familiar to me; this person had harassed me many times after the Congressman followed me on Twitter a month or so ago. Since I had dealt with this person and his cohorts before I assumed that the tweet and the picture were their latest attempts at defaming the Congressman and harassing his supporters.

This will be read by the tens of thousands who read that paper.

What will likely not be read by those same tens of thousands are two tweets she put out last night saying:

1. I never said or implied that the alleged “stalker” was behind the tweet

2. I never once speculated about the alleged hacking.

Say WHAT? This is Bill Clinton grade: “it depends on the meaning of the what the word ‘is’ is” style.

It would seem to me the statement’s purpose was not to deal with unanswered questions but to get the “I’m being harassed by the right” theme out so the left can follow-up with nonsense like this from Joan Walsh:

It’s about @AndrewBreitbart and insane bloggers savaging a 21 year old girl.

Apparently the media not able to contain the story has decided their narrative is going to be about evil right wingers harassing a poor innocent 21-year-old journalism student.

PLEASE!

This narrative is designed to do one thing: to take the spotlight off of the suddenly silent Anthony Weiner and to avoid asking Ms. Cordova some specific questions such as:

1. Did you at any time send or relieve Direct Messages with Congressman Weiner via Twitter or any software used to access Twitter?

2. Did anyone from the Congressman’s office contact you at any time between the time the tweet became known and the release of your statement.

3. Did you exchange direct messages with Tommy Christopher of Mediate before the release of your statement, and if so what was the nature of said messages?

4. Who if anyone aided in the drafting, editing and presentation of your prepared statement, was a lawyer consulted

I think if you were keenly observant, you might have noticed something curious over the weekend: The normally loquacious @RepWeiner didn’t have a damned thing to say about this whole “hacking” incident, except a couple of vague jokes.

Does it not strike you as odd, Ms. Walsh, that the New York congressman — who has never been known to be averse to TV cameras — did not rush into a studio, or call a press conference, to rebut the accusation that he had Tweeted photos of his tumescence to a 21-year-old?

So the loquacious congressman says nothing, while his spokesman issues denials and, after 36 “anxiety-filled” hours, we get a confusing statement from the self-described “fan” of Weiner to whom the notorious photo was addressed.

There is something wrong with this story, Ms. Walsh. And what’s wrong has nothing to do with Andrew Breitbart.

1. Why did Rep. Weiner, who only follows 200 people, choose to follow 21 year old college student Gennette Cordova?

2. And how exactly did he come to follow her?

Ms. Walsh, may I point out that Andrew Breitbart was not following the young lady on Twitter but a certain congressman in a district 2900 miles from her was. I don’t claim to be a professional journalist but it would seem to me that any reporter whose goal is the truth of this matter rather than defending a congressman beloved by the left would be asking questions. Andrew Breitbart is not the story here no matter how much you or the Daily Kos crowd wish it to be so.

Meanwhile as paid reports cry “Breitbart” and unleash the dogs of indignation Ace of Spades contacted the alleged “harasser” who answered direct questions posed to him (I also contacted him asking to speak to him by phone last night, he choose not to speak by phone and I choose not to ask my questions via the net).

Have you been contacted by any law enforcement officers or agents whatsoever?

His answer:

No one. Nada. I keep saying bring it on. I have nothing to hide. Not my IP nothing to hide at all.

No one from law enforcement contacted Detective Colby Hall’s number one suspect in the hacking case of the decade? No one? No one at all?

Excuse Me?

Additionally the gentleman in question has offered to hand over anything an investigator might want concerning this. Ace again:

Isn’t it odd that Weiner and the Comely Coed are not calling the police, while the man the left has all-but-accused as being behind this is the only one who wants a police investigation?

It apparently isn’t odd if you are Joan Walsh or Colby Hall of Mediate. Apparently Ace has demonstrated reporting is one of those jobs American reporters don’t want to do .

Oh and Joan, Colby in case you missed it Bryan Preston notes another Coincidence that a reporter might choose to ask about

It was just a coincidence that Rep. Anthony Weiner had spent much of Friday on twitter (where he could tweet publicly as well as direct message, of course) laying in wait for a supposed Clarence Thomas docu-dump; and it was a coincidence that Weiner happened to see the allegedly criminal tweet, and was able to delete the tweet in question within minutes of it going off into the wild, even though he allegedly had nothing to do with sending that tweet in the first place. He’s a regular Twitter Batman.

Think about it; a “hack” of Congressman Weiner’s accounts DURING THE MEMORIAL DAY WEEKEND that has the potential to damage his reputation takes place just as he just happens to be sitting there ready to delete the offending tweet and picture.

What a lucky guy!

Oh one last thing, take a look at this story from CBS. Here is the headline:

…during our current war on terror was spoken at daily mass this morning.

the hour is coming when everyone who kills you will think he is offering worship to God. They will do this because they have not known either the Father or me. I have told you this so that when their hour comes you may remember that I told you.John 16:2b-4a

Is this not the perfect description of those we are fighting? The radical Islamist? The Atta who flies a plane into a building thinking he brings glory to God? The suicide bomber who blows himself up at a checkpoint or a mosque? Not to mention those who are killed for converting to the Christian faith either by laws or by families trying to preserve “honor”.

Until we acknowledge as a nation that this is the face of our foe, we will continue to be vulnerable.

Like this:

I left the PC to grill some burgers, dogs and pinwheels from Romano’s Mkt and here comes a Memeorandum thread on my first post and several new developments:

Before we get to them lets say this: there is no evidence that this young lady has done anything wrong. She is a 21-year-old girl and the only thing we definitely know is somebody sent her a lewd photo on twitter. That reflects on the person who sent it.

Item: The young lady in question now has a new twitter account. @GennetteC.

It would appear that there are very few tweets on the account, very few followers (only 63) at the moment but I suspect that will grow. She has announced that she will be releasing a statement soon and has thanked her friends from keeping the press away from her.

However as Ladd Ehlinger tweets an item of interest. He notes one of the four people she is currently following happens to be Tommy Christopher of Mediate who has coincidentally put up an article that suggests in addition to questions concerning Rep Weiner’s story we need to take a closer look at conservative Dan Wolfe who as he puts it:

So, a guy who has been building exactly this narrative for months turns out to be the one and only unique retweet of the picture in question? Just as Rep. Weiner’s cryptic hashtag about the Seattle time zone is reason to raise reasonable flag of suspicion, so too is this.

Now of course the fact that a left leaning blogger making this statement is apparently one of the only 4 people the young lady is following and she is about to make a statement might be totally coincidental.

If you’re like me, then you’re someone who is guilty of caring about what goes on in the life and minds of celebrities. When people are really famous, chances are they do not have a personal Facebook page that fans have access to; most celebrities use a fan page that is usually managed by someone else. In contrast, Twitter has thousands and thousands of verified, personal, celebrity accounts. The reason being, Facebook is a private social network, while Twitter is essentially an online environment for public news dissemination. Celebs can give their fans access to their tweets without the burden of being every fan’s “friend.”

Let’s stipulate again that this could just be a coincidental observation that any person could have made about twitter. It just happened to be her.

Occam’s Razor suggests that the coincidences aren’t just that. But we’ll see.

There’s the rub. Any single one of these things can be explained away innocently enough, the problem is that for the hacker story to hold EVERY single one of these “coincidences” have to be explained away.

There are certain headline formulas that are automatically newsworthy. “Congressman + coed” is one. “Congressman + porn star” is another. The fact that the story appears to be only a case of inappropriate private communication — no one is suggesting that Weiner was boinking his Twitter friends — does not lessen its news value.

Remember that no one ever claimed that Rep. Mark Foley had sexual relationships with House pages. It was the “inappropriate communication” that got him.

If ‘benefit of the doubt’ isn’t good enough for the person you’re married to, then it’s not good enough for the practice of journalism. And by not acting as curious as a spouse – usually because of ideological agreement with the subject of inquiry – reporters aren’t doing their jobs.

I came to twitter very late in the game, so unlike many bloggers both bigger and smaller than me, my total number of followers is very small (787 as of this morning). To give you an idea of how that stands with someone of some celebrity; Joe Scarborough of MSNBC who I write about a bit has over 100,000 followers (100,935 to be exact as of this morning).

As a person relatively new to media I remember the first time a major paper started following me (NY Post) it was a big deal.

I also only follow 323 people as a rule I try to follow about half the number of people who follow me. That generates a plenty big twitter stream. I simply can’t see how people keep up with following thousands of people. To continue the above example; Joe Scarborough only follows 394 people. Keep that number in mind as it is important.

Now compared to Joe Scarborough I’m a person of very little celebrity. I’ve been blogging for maybe 2 1/2 years with a total of a bit over 550k hits overall between the old and the current blog. I’ve have had a radio show on a 50,000 Watt Station heard in 6 states for about 6 months. In Fitchburg Mass. that a big deal, in Worcester county it matters. In DC or NY that means very little.

By comparison Joe Scarborough served in congress, has a Morning Show on MSNBC that is watched by an awful lot of people. Writes a weekly commentary and is known by movers and shakers all over the country.

Why is this important? Well I just “followed” Beulah Garrett @beulahgg who mentioned me in a tweet a few hours ago. She will likely notice that I did so, she may or may not look at my profile and may or may not be impressed; as a great-grandmother she has likely seen enough that it takes more than me to impress her.

Now Let’s say Joe Scarborough choose to follow Ms. Garrett. Joe has over 100k followers, if he choose to follow Ms.Garrett I suspect she would take a lot more notice and might even be impressed.

What does Joe Scarborough and who follows or doesn’t follow me or Ms. Garrett have to do with Congressman Anthony Weiner of NY 9th district and his claim that someone hacked his twitter and photo accounts to send a photo of an erect penis in underwear to a young lady? Everything!

Congressman Weiner’s district is in NY. He is a man of some national prominence, a liberal who is not afraid of taking on conservatives directly. The phone message at his national office is personable and friendly. He is a regular guest on Morning Joe and is not shy about appearing anywhere. His national prominence dwarfs mine of course.

As of this moment 10:03 a.m. EST he has over 45K followers (45737 to be exact) I’m not one of them. He also follows only 194 people.

Until 48 hours ago one of those people was Genette Nicole Cordova tweetname @Gennette Noble the young lady who is at the center of this interesting event.

Just to remind you. Gennette Noble Gennette Nicole Cordova is a 21-year-old college student in Seattle Washington. She writes for the college newspaper. She seems a fairly attractive young girl and until 24 hours ago I knew absolutely nothing about her. I doubt many people on the net did. It would be fair to say that her prominence compared to me is of the same proportion of my prominence compared to Joe Scarborough.

If one wants to believe the congressman’s story one can say she is just trying to avoid further unwanted publicity. One might be able to rationalize that.

One can’t rationalize the fact that until all of this came out, a New York Congressman of some national prominence was following her on twitter. I’m 48 years old and was impressed by being followed by Dana Loesch and Kathryn Lopez tell me how impressed a 20 something year old college girl would be by being followed by a congressman 3000 miles away?

Any person who uses twitter understands with this means. They also know two other things:

1. If two people follow each other on twitter they can send private messages unseen by others

2..The difference between a private message and a public one is two characters

@rsmccain This message is public

d rsmccain this message is private

The difference is a “@” sign and the letter “d”

This is why the MSM is desperate to kill this quickly, that is why the left side of the sphere will be crying Andrew Breitbart till their voices grow horse hoarse, it’s also why this scandal will not be able to be contained by the left.

Joe Scarborough knows twitter, he also knows Andrew Weiner, if he chooses to look at the follower numbers he will know what it means. That bad for Anthony Weiner, the left and the MSM.

What’s worse for them? There are millions of people who use twitter who have absolutely no interest in politics, who when they see the numbers concerning followers also will understand exactly what it means.

The left and Rep Weiner have one long weekend to decide how they are going to handle this. I don’t envy them. They might be able to persuade the media to leave it alone but the meaning and details of this scandal can be understood by millions of people in 140 characters or less.

Update: Two quick things, Ace of Spades notes that at the time this broke Rep Weiner only followed 91 people, not the just under 200 people he follows now and asks.

What could possibly cause a big macher Congressman decide to follow a kid in college?

The photo at the link contains both reasons.

Secondly I am reminded of Robert Stacy McCain’s a reporter of National prominence who has covered the powerful for years reaction when Alyssa Milano re-tweeted him:

That’s how unusual it is for a nationally known reporter to re-tweeted by Alyssa Milano (and he worked hard for that re-tweet ,) how much less likely is it for a college student on a school paper to be followed by a congressman in NY?

Like this:

Our lesson for today on “How to be a Journalist” comes from Robert Stacy McCain.

Today word came out that there was an interesting tweet from the account of Representative Anthony Weiner that included a picture that was shall we say odd for a married congressman directed to a particular account on twitter.

So, around the same time he was tweeting about hockey, he sends the underwear photos to that woman at @GennetteNicole. Don’t bother looking there, though. Rep. Weiner’s photos are all erased. And Gennette seems to have deleted her entire Twitter account. And, it seems, her Facebook account.

Rep Weiner claims his account was hacked but the sudden deletion of the Twitter and Facebook accounts of the at the time unknown lady in question are interesting too.

Enter Robert Stacy McCain, who has a history of not jumping to conclusions. Within a few hours he had identified the young lady in question and has asked actual relevant questions:

Was Rep. Weiner exchanging online messages with Ms. Cordova? If so, why? If this is all just a misunderstanding — if Rep. Weiner was the victim of hackers — why was Ms. Cordova the recipient of that message? Why would a hacker randomly select a student journalist in Washington State to send that to?

The congressman’s office can either answer those questions — and answer them PDQ — or else wait until every political reporter on the West Coast is camped out in front of Ms. Cordova’s house.

Mediate weighed in attacking Breitbart site meanwhile Stacy contacted Andrew directly and in the course of their conversation the following additional question arose?

But here is a question Breitbart posed during our phone conversation: If someone hacked Rep. Weiner’s online accounts, isn’t that a crime? Isn’t it, indeed, a national security threat?

OK, so has Rep. Weiner reported this crime to the police? Is the FBI investigating? When will we have a press conference at which Rep. Weiner vows to get to bottom of this crime against him, and bring the perpetrators to justice?

There is a dog there, you see. And as Sherlock Holmes might point out, that dog is not barking.

As for what I think? I’m not sure, it would be idiocy for a rep to do this but NY-26 was not too long ago and I’ve given up thinking that when it comes to sex congressional brains engage, but from the reaction of the left I think they believe it.

Consider: If this was all hokum the smart thing to do would be to wait, let the right stick out its collective neck and then when it turns out to be smoke and mirrors, or a hacking or even something else (Stacy has theorized an aide in his office who might have been pretending to be the congressman in order to score, that would make some sense) then they could demand massive retractions and apologies all around.

Yet instead the left has decided to play the “Andrew Breitbart can’t be trusted so you must ignore this story” card. This smacks of desperation. Presumably the left would have contacts with Rep Weiner’s office and would be able to confirm his story fairly easily. Yet instead of doing this, they are hitting Breitbart.

This reaction, more than anything else, speaks volumes.

So since Stacy is giving reporting lessons I took the liberty of calling congressman Weiner’s office, the recorded messaged referred me to a press number to call after hours. I called the number and the gentleman named Joe who answered claimed I had the wrong number so I called back the congressman’s office to confirm the number in question (it was correct) and called the press number again. It now goes directly to voice mail. I left my name and home and cell numbers at both locations, and I’ll let you know if anything pans out, but I found that reaction…interesting.

Note: This is a condensed version of this long essay that I wrote while in Worcester during a jury duty wait. The told the parallel stories of the US Navy during the War of 1812 and the history of the electoral landscape between 2008 and 2010. I have removed the paragraphs concerning Captains Charles Stewart and Stephen Bainbridge and edited the piece to remove the transitions between the stories. The full piece is available here.

On Election Day 2008, Barack H. Obama won the presidency winning states such as North Carolina and Virginia which Democrats had not taken in years and retaining democratic strongholds such as Massachusetts and New Jersey; while in congress Democrats made solid gains winning a large congressional majority in the house and a super-majority in the Senate.

On every major network Pundits proclaimed it the start of a new democratic Era. Books poured out about the president, T-Shirts were selling briskly, a massive crowd turned up for the inauguration, and off in England Russell T. Davies was writing a script for the final episode of David Tennant’s run as the 10th Doctor Who’s with the climatic event of the first part was to take place as the world awaited a plan by President Obama to solve the world wide economic crisis. Pundits a plenty reasoned that the era of Reagan was over. Republicans such as Chris Buckley and David Brooks talked about the power of Obama and David Frum began his Frum Forum determined to take the Republican Party away from what they considered the conservative extreme and back to the middle where it could one day triumph.

Shortly after the election Rush Limbaugh, unapologetic defender of conservatism and the single most popular person on Radio declared that it was not the time to stop fighting. He maintained that the election was not a mandate against conservatism, indeed it was only the inclusion of Conservative Republican Sarah Palin that gave the campaign any energy and accounted for the only brief lead in the polls the campaign enjoyed. As Governor Sarah Palin returned to Alaska where Democrats, mindful of the energy she brought to the Republican side; unleashed a string of frivolous ethics complaints determined to neutralize her once and for all, Rush declared publicly on his radio show about President Obama: “I hope he fails”. In February he was scheduled to be the keynote and final speaker at CPAC where he would face a crowd of conservative activists at their lowest ebb of their political lives.

Rush Limbaugh stood at the podium at CPAC to make his case. Fox News knowing Limbaugh’s popularity with their viewers and CNN knowing he was a ratings magnet both decided to cover the speech live. Limbaugh’s “First public address to the American People” was a scheduled 40 minute speech but went nearly 90 covering conservative ground, explaining why he believed the Liberal Obama agenda would be disastrous to America. The liberal media roundly condemned his speech and the White House was delighted at the opportunity to make Limbaugh the face of the Republican Party confident that the quality and charisma of Barack Obama was more than a match for him.

Three thousand miles away on July 3rd 2009 Sarah Palin called a news conference and shocked the world by announcing she was resigning as Governor of Alaska. She maintained that the constant barrage of frivolous complaints was costing the state money and time. Pundits around the country added “quitter” to their less printable pejoratives and pronounced her power and influence at an end. Rush Limbaugh didn’t think so. He believed that this freed her from the constraints of office and allowed her to advance the conservative cause nationwide. Limbaugh’s ratings had increased as his visibility as the president’s chief opponent emerged and thousands of people who had never listened to his show before tuned in to see what he had to say, but the media and pundits dismissed this saying it was good for Limbaugh’s pocketbook but meant nothing in terms of the election or in terms of the power of the Nobel winning president.

Sarah Palin’s Facebook page attacking the president’s priority, the healthcare bill, is still available online but it was no less blunt decrying the government role in rationing care as “death panels”. It produced more consternation by the MSM, but she would not yield an inch. Message after message would be penned by Palin that would reach millions of readers through her Facebook page and her Book. Rush Limbaugh trumpeted her methods and her embrace of the Tea Party movement. He had her as a guest to promote her book which would sell millions of copies totally bypassing the media that held her and them to such scorn while MSM. ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and MSNBC continued to deride him as an entertainer, her as politically irrelevant and the tea party as racists.

On September 12, 2009 hundreds of thousands of tea party activists gathered on the mall at the Capital protesting the Obama administration. Conservative leaders spoke to the largely blue collar crowd to proclaim that they were going to take their county back. The media took note but scoffed, the numbers were astroturf and the Nobel winning president still held vast majorities in both houses. Elections were two months away in Virginia and New Jersey for Governor, a special election in New York’s 23th district saw the republican party embrace a liberal candidate named Dede Scozzafava and in January a special election would be held to replace the late Ted Kennedy who had held the seat since 1962. Let’s see what would happen THEN.

On Election Night the news astounded the nation. In Virginia Republicans had retaken the governorship previously held by the DNC Chairman Tim Kaine by a wide margin, In New York 23 Sarah Palin followed shortly by Rush Limbaugh endorsed the Conservative party Candidate Doug Hoffman over Dede Scocafava who eventually dropped out of the race a week before the election, the victory was Pyrrhic as she, despite tens of thousands of dollars of support by the NRCC, threw her support to the democrat Bob Owens who would edge Hoffman in a squeaker. In New Jersey Chris Christie would shock the political world by winning the Governorship of the state a shock that would be exceeded on January 19th 2009 when Scott Brown down 15 points according to the Boston Globe would defeat Martha Coakley in a race that would energize the entire Republican Party nationwide.

The results of the election were explosive although Obamacare passed with the help of democrats such as Bart Stupak he and others such as Chris Dodd and Bill Delahunt decided that this was the year to retire. Rush continued to push for conservatism and Sarah Palin campaigned tirelessly for Republican candidates all over the country targeting 20 specific democrats for defeat and raising money to help support others. The effect was electric in states such as Massachusetts, where uncontested seats were a fact of life, suddenly found almost every race contested from 9 of the 10 congressional seats all the way down to auditor. Candidates like John Olver, Richard Neal and Barney Frank who had spent previous elections campaigning and donating to fellow democrats all over the country found themselves spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend seats that had never been at issue before. Nervous Democrats opened the spigots, funding 3rd party candidates to siphon off voters that might otherwise go to republican challengers. Media decried republican funding sources even as Democrats outspent their GOP counterparts, some like Jim McGovern by ratios as high as 30-1.

The Expectations game had shifted for 2010 as well. The conventional wisdom went from a 30 seat pickup for the GOP to a 40 and then from 40 to fifty and before Election Day came, some pundits were predicting as many as 75 seats for the GOP. Likewise in the senate the conventional wisdom went from small gains to larger gains to even the chance of picking up the full nine seats needed to flip the Senate. Pundits who had previously declared Rush Limbaugh a blowhard and Sarah Palin irrelevant and ineffective how were reduced to stating openly that if the candidates they supported in deep blue states such as California and Delaware failed to win, they would be considered failures no matter how many seats were won elsewhere.

On Election day the results were in and they were a slaughter, not since 1920 had so many seats fallen into republican hands and not since 1932 had either party managed to Capture the 63 seats that republicans did. 18 of the 20 democrats targeted by Sarah Palin were defeated and 6 Senate seats were taken by the Grand old party. In consolation Blue states such as Massachusetts and California remained blue Massachusetts after millions upon millions of dollars were spent and Union Activists given the day off by the state manned every polling place to insure that every possible democrat voted. Close calls were dodged by in districts such as ny-22 and Va-11 but only two seats La-2 and on in Hawaii formally held by republicans fell to the Democratic Party.

On November 3rd President Obama talked about learning the lessons of the election and spoke of compromise and working with the newly elected Republican house. Thursday November 4th 2010 on MSNBC’s Morning Joe Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough scoffed at Sarah Palin’s victory proclamation pointing out that candidates she backed failed to win in Delaware (held by democrats since 1973) Nevada (held by democrats since 1987 ) and California (Where a republican had not held the senate seat since the Johnson Administration) Politico derided her saying that less than half of her candidates (regardless of strength) won election, ignoring significant victories by Palin supported candidates in North Carolina, Florida and New Hampshire, all states that had voted for Barack Obama just two years before.

Not all fell for MSNBC and Politico’s spin. CBS news pointed out Sarah Palin endorsed 43 house candidates of which 30 won while winning 7 of 12 Senate endorsed candidates. Senator Jim Demitt said “she’s done a lot of good for the Republican Party, and for our country.” And Rush Limbaugh, having none of the spin of the majority of the Mainstream media on the 4th said: “If anybody is an obvious winner here, aside, of course, from me, it would be Palin.”

So to conservatives who are basking in the joy of a historic question I say to you : “Never forget that it is to Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin that you really owe these victories.”

That is why I support Sarah Palin. Since the initial run of this piece Palin has continued to write, put pressure on the administration, defend conservatism and take the slings and arrows of the media. She continues to lead from the front and refuses to play the media’s game (or the establishment GOP’s game) by their rules.

I’ve mentioned and featured a lot of bloggers worth promoting, but this week the blogger I’m going to feature is…me.

The only critique that I’ve gotten concerning the show is something I never get in person. You don’t talk enough! (I mention this at the 5th street diner and I thought Tina was going to keel over laughing.

I’m going to talk a bit about political courage, Fishbait Miller the Republican Field for 2012 and I’m going to stress a theme that I’ve pushed on the blog for a couple of months.

You can listen live as always at the WCRN web site, and the show will be up and podcasted either today or tomorrow, and if you want to put in your two cents Call us at 508-438-0965, e-mail me at DaRadio@datechguyblog.com or tweet me with the has tags #daradio or #wcrn and we’ll talk.

I’ll also have some prizes to give away as well.

Next week we’ll be back to the old format with Stephen Crowder as our guest but today there are things that need to be said and I’m going to say them.

(a) If a play is being made on the obstructed runner, or if the batter runner is obstructed before he touches first base, the ball is dead and all runners shall advance, without liability to be put out, to the bases they would have reached, in the umpire’s judgment, if there had been no obstruction. The obstructed runner shall be awarded at least one base beyond the base he had last legally touched before the obstruction.

NOTE: The catcher, without the ball in his possession, has no right to block the pathway of the runner attempting to score. The base line belongs to the runner and the catcher should be there only when he is fielding a ball or when he already has the ball in his hand.

Let’s put it another way. No Catcher including Buster Posey may block the plate or be in front of the plate or obstruct the plate without Already having possession of the ball and until the rule is actually changed no Catcher including Posey had any business being where he was in the basepath.

If people want to change the rules, fine, but until then stop blocking the plate.

One of the least remarked upon aspects of the Obama presidency has been the lack of scandals. Since Watergate, presidential and executive branch scandal has been an inescapable feature of the American presidency, but the current administration has not yet suffered a major scandal…

I would like to point out to Mr. Nyhan that instapundit is a link aggregation site, so each of those links actually go to OTHER SITES that have been covering scandals that Nr. Nyhan hasn’t noticed. J. Christian Adams, Black Panthers, ATF, Eric Holder? Never heard of them….tell me Brendan how do you define a scandal?

…which I define as a widespread elite perception of wrongdoing.

The elites? Your waiting for the elites? The same elites who ignored the John Edwards Scandal, are you actually kidding me?

To see how absolutely blind he is you have to read this section

In the 1977-2008 period, the longest that a president has gone without having a scandal featured in a front-page Washington Post article is 34 months – the period between when President Bush took office in January 2001 and the Valerie Plame scandal in October 2003. Obama has already made it almost as long despite the lack of a comparable event to the September 11 terrorist attacks. Why?

You are defining the absence of a scandal based on the Washington Post? A MSM media organ that would rather crawl on broken glass than hit Obama, the home of the Journolist?

Only a person totally clueless in media reality could have written this, which guarantees the MSM will pick this up and run with it boldly.

Cain has come out of the gate making knowledge blunders (not knowing what the “right of return” is, for example), getting generally dismissive coverage. There is no team of reporters covering his every move on the trail, as there is for Huntsman. There’s no massive scrum outside his appearances, as there is for Pawlenty. And yet he’s outpolling Pawlenty.

Does Weigel do this, Why yes! While Praising Herman Cain he damns Sarah Palin in the guise of critiquing Byron York for missing the primary story:

But we’re talking about the 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee who has been the subject of multiple books (including two of her own), two documentaries, and in some months as much as 50 percent of all media coverage of the GOP field. Fifteen percent? That’s actually about half of what she got in the very first survey of this primary, a February 2009 CNN poll.

As long as the left was reasonably sure Sarah Palin was not running, Herman Cain needed to be ignored by the MSM. They couldn’t take the chance of him becoming a threat to Mitt Romney and/or Jon Hunstman, who are the most likely GOP candidates to lose to Obama. That means any attention Dave gave Herman online wasn’t picked up by the MSM.

I sort of like the idea of Palin doing this on Memorial Day weekend, a time when plenty of reporters (like, er, me) are headed out of D.C. Brings back memories of her giving reporters a July 3, 2009 assignment to cover her resignation announcement.

It seemed interesting to me the very day polls indicate that Palin might be running, Weigel’s first post is: “Gosh that Herman Cain looks pretty impressive doesn’t he?”

But what I found more newsworthy is the strong performance of Herman Cain, the entrepreneur and talk-show host who was included in Gallup’s poll for the first time. He polls at 8 percent, ahead of candidates like Tim Pawlenty, Michele Bachmann and Jon Hunstman, who have received far more attention.

Well what do you know Nate Silver in the NYT is impressed by Herman Cain too! What an amazing coincidence!

Now I’ve already said I like Herman Cain, but mark my words, the “Journo-listic” MSM will suddenly find him a lot more interesting and worthy of coverage for as long as they think he will take votes away from Palin.

Will Herman take advantage of it? He’s not running to lose so of course he will, but I suspect that if the media’s attempt to use him to neutralize Palin succeeds then they will no longer consider him newsworthy or electable.

Update 2: On Morning Joe the entire thesis of the opening team is Sarah Palin is NOT running (One thing they didn’t mention her age, she would only be 60 in 2024 so she has a ton of time). They spent their time saying she will not, Politico also says she was not running, calling it an “attention grab”. (They don’t deign to mention this Byron York Piece)

And surprise surprise, who do they not mention by name? Herman Cain!

Remember the thesis, If Palin is running they boost Cain, if not they ignore him. As long as they believe Palin is out, Cain (who they also fear) must be kept down.

Update 3: Same theme on Today. They maintain Palin is not running so not only to they fail to mention Cain they don’t even show the Herman Cain Graphic in the Gallup poll. Can’t show a Black Republican in 3rd 5th place if Palin isn’t running.

I really like Dave, only met him one but Stacy McCain vouches for him and there was something about the man that just seems right, but I think he’s dead wrong on Palin. But check out my stuff and make up your own mind and give me what for if you would like to.

…of what the media and the left actually thinks or her chances to win in 2012.

For months the MSM has gone with the meme that a Palin candidacy helps Obama and if she is nominated it guarantees the president a second term.

Every report, every signal, every single statement over and over again has attempted to reinforce this idea to the general public and to gullible establishment republicans.

As we get closer to the nominating process and the election actually takes shape I suspect we will be finding out just how much these people believe it.

As it is a given that these people support Obama over any republican, they will naturally want to play up Palin’s strength. If she guarantees a victory for Democrats the media would do all in their power to make sure that she is the nominee.

Gone will be the tabloid like coverage, gone will be the attempts to twist her into a joke, instead you will see the MSM subtlety encourage her candidacy and try to push her over the top to make sure that The One™ is guaranteed the second term they believe he so richly deserves.

At least that’s what they would do if they actually believed she was the joke they pretend she is.

When you see the attacks by the media intensify and the leftist blogs follow suit, you will discover what some of us already know; the left will tell you who they fear and they’ve feared Sarah Palin from the moment she was announced by John McCain.

Congress gave Netanyahu 29 standing ovations for a 40-minute speech, while Obama received 25 in a much longer State of the Union address. Obviously, with the rebuke floating in the Senate, the standing Os were more than just gracious hospitality. While Obama and his team committed one gaffe after another on his current junket, Netanyahu gave a tour de force performance that ended up making Obama look petty, radical, and unschooled. Democrats can’t abandon Obama quickly enough on his new peace initiative, which tells us all we need to know about who won this round.

No matter what the media tells you, no matter what Harry Reid tells you, the Democrats are afraid. How afraid? The white house is so worried about 2012 they found it necessary to beef up a rapid response team a year early, and the Democrats in congress are so afraid that they ran, led by Harry Reid, from the president on Israel like a bat out of hell. Cripes even Bill Clinton has figured it out:

The Fact is that Newt is right, the democrats are going to lose spectacularly.

Actions speak louder than words, and the democrats actions are those of a party that is afraid.

So my advice to republicans who are hedging their bets instead of fighting is the same it’s always been:

Ride Right Through them They’re Demoralized as hell!

It’s doubtful that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in his wildest, most optimistic dreams, would have dared to imagine when he set off for the United States last week that Israelis would respond to his six-day trip so enthusiastically: According to a new Haaretz poll, they are giving the visit high marks, considering it an overwhelming success.

The poll, conducted by the Dialog organization, under the supervision of Prof. Camil Fuchs of the Tel Aviv University Statistics Department, showed that 47 percent of the Israeli public believes the U.S. trip was a success, while only 10 percent viewed it as a failure.

Considering the topic of the show you might think these actions against a successful woman like Laura Ingraham would warrant a mention particularly since it’s all about women knowing their worth in the business world.

Well it is now 8:52 they are in their 2nd to last batch of commercials and they have not only NOT mentioned it once, but they are still running the Ed Schultz Lean Forward commercials during the show.

At 8:55 they came back long enough to show a Conan clip, all that is left is the What Have we Learned Today bit.

I’ll tell you what we’ve learned, that Morning Joe is whatever else it is about today, is not about empowering women, it’s about covering MSNBC rear end.

I would call it journalistic malpractice, but I think its more like Journolist-tic practice.

Update: Think about it, the woman on Morning Joe felt so empowered that they dare not mention that a star of an MSNBC show was suspended for misogynistic remarks about a powerful woman!

2. If the answer to question one is “No” since the highly liberal New York Times took 160 years to have an openly gay op/ed columnist have we established that “160 years” is an acceptable watermark/deliminator to decide how quickly institutions can wait before advancing an opening gay person to their most prestigious positions without being considered bigots/racists/homophobes?

Like this:

House Speaker Newt Gingrich predicted Republicans would make huge gains in next year’s elections. “I think we’ll pick up a dozen Senate seats and 30 to 40 House seats,” Gingrich said. That would give Republicans their second biggest House majority in history and their third biggest gain in Senate seats ever.

Like this:

Republicans scored an upset in one of Hawaii’s most Liberal Congressional districts on Tuesday, dealing a blow to the national Democratic Party in a race that largely turned on the party’s plan to overhaul Healthcare.

Oops sorry that is the headline and lead paragraph that the NYT should have run a year ago when Charles Djou won a congressional seat against a divided democratic party in Hawaii last May if they treated that election the same way they did NY-26.

It’s a game you can play with MSM sites, Reuters for instance:

Here are the lead paragraphs that Reuters ran yesterday and one year ago, can you guess which one is which?

One story minor unimportant victory of minority party signaling nothing, the other a seizmic shift the the political landscape. If you can’t figure out which is the GOP win and which is the Democratic win then you might be a liberal or a member of the MSM psy-ops campaign.

This is leading. Little Miss Attila is going all in on Pawlenty in the same way that Stacy is all in on Herman Cain. It’s not a secret who my first choice, nor is it a secret that I’m impressed by Herman Cain but if Pawlenty keeps this up I will certainly be willing to give him a 2nd look.

Like this:

You have the Ny-26 election, you have the tornados in the midwest and they led with Netanyahu’s speech. It took them 11 minutes to get to the election in western NY.

Of course once they got there they didn’t disappoint not showing the “tea party” candidate Davis and his graphic because the viewers would put two and two together and get four and using Scott “I was for the Ryan Plan before I was against it” Brown to hit Ryan’s plan. (He will be on today, that should be interesting).

The fact that the MSNBC morning show led with the Netanyahu speech and highlighted the fact that he got more standing O’s then the one how earth shattering it was. Of course, perhaps the idea was to show Democrats along with the GOP supporting Israel to make sure the money from liberal Jews keeps coming.

In the wake of the US raid in Abbottabad that killed Osama bin Laden, China has “warned in unequivocal terms that any attack on Pakistan would be construed as an attack on China”, a media report claimed today. The warning was formally conveyed by the Chinese foreign minister at last week’s China-US strategic dialogue and economic talks in Washington

For instance, what about the Predator attacks on terrorists in the border regions? Pakistan has officially protested these attacks while unofficially tolerating them. If China is serious about its message, will they insist on an end to all operations within Pakistan from now on? And how will China respond to an attack on Pakistan under a doctrine that’s not dissimilar from NATO’s charter? Will they attack the US and start a war, or will they react only diplomatically?

You can take it to the bank the China will at best react diplomatically, China has been flexing its diplomatic and economic muscles worldwide but their ability to project military power worldwide hasn’t kept up.

China’s worldwide interests are very vulnerable to US international power that can be projected around the globe in a way that China can not. Economically China is also highly dependent on the purchase of cheap goods by the US. In case of war with America, how quickly would China’s merchant marine, oil tankers and global trade quickly find itself transformed into new artificial coral reefs all over the ocean floor thanks to our submarine fleet?

And with a populace already now expecting more from their communist government as their standard of living improves, how will a government that depends on a strong standing army and secret police to control unrest going to be able to fight what would frankly become a global war while preventing revolution at home?

If I”m right then why is China doing this now? Because for all the “I’ve got Bin Laden” bravado in the White House the Chinese understand that with this crew in the White House NOW is the time for their Rhineland gambit. They aren’t just assuming the US will not answer, they are counting on it!

I guarantee you that if the Rhineland gambit is not challenged we will see it followed by a Sudetenland gambit.

I maintain that the tabloids which, the moment this story broke, and before we were aware of his version of the facts—or any facts at all—called Strauss-Kahn a “perv” (the New York Daily News headline), were indignant at his release on bail (the New York Post: “Frog Legs It”) and echoed unconfirmed rumors, always playing against him and changing every two hours (hasty departure… airline ticket purchased at the last minute… looking stressed out…), have set themselves up as judges in the place of the judges—which is still another infraction of the most elementary of rules of law.

It’s clear that democrats in Massachusetts would use support of the Ryan plan as a weapon against him, but I took Brown at his word that he had specific objections to the plan. Everybody doesn’t agree with everything so I didn’t consider it a big deal. When people objected on twitter to the vote saying we need a real conservative in Massachusetts I asked “A real conservative like Martha Coakley?”

I was going to let it drop until the word started going around that Scott Brown couldn’t vote for the Ryan plan because of Newt poisoned the water and look at the League of Woman voters attacks.

Let’s answer this stuff now:

1. I don’t know what other people’s expectations but I expect my US Senator’s to use a standard other than “Does Newt Gingrich put his foot in his mouth” on what will be supported or not.

2. If anyone in the GOP thinks that the League of Liberal Women voters or any other liberal group is going to go less all out against Scott Brown they are deluding themselves. Brown could vote a straight Harry Reid line and Massachusetts liberals would spend tens of millions to destroy him.

I’m very much hoping that this “We can’t vote for this with a tough election” line is not officially sanctioned from the Brown campaign, because if it is then that means they didn’t learn this lesson:

#3 Light Dawns on Marble Head

The league’s actions clearly demonstrate the futility of courting the media and “mainstream” groups. It is a lesson he may not understand but he needs to learn asap. Senator Brown you’re a nice guy but get this through your head:

No matter how many votes you give them, no matter many words you say or do. LIBERAL NGO’S AND THE MSM ARE NOT GOING TO SUPPORT YOU IN 2012.

Once you get this through your head, the rest is easy.

Of these lessons the 3rd is the most important for Senator Brown to learn, will he be wise enough to do so. That is the $64,000 question.

It is the failure to learn this lesson that has cost the GOP over and over again.

I think Scott Brown is a good senator and a decent fellow. I was very pleased to support him in 2010 and I expect to support him in 2012, but if anyone thinks that appeasing liberals is the way to win they are deluding themselves. Brown won by only 5 points in a huge turnout, he may want prevent defections among independents but he definitely can’t afford defections from his base, because those are the people who make the calls, who do the stand outs and buttonhole folks.

Update: Kelly Ayotte just stated on Fox she would vote for the plan, yet one more reason for conservatives in Massachusetts to move to New Hampshire

Meanwhile anyone even slightly informed about the Herman Cain campaign is aware that his fundraising arm is “Friends of Herman Cain.” Yet days after he pointed out that his old PAC is inactive MSNBC reports that Cain only has $15 bucks or so because that is all that’s in the old PAC.

What does this tell you? It tells you that the Cain campaign has the potential to break out and the left is desperate to make sure this doesn’t happen. They rightly fear that between the Cain campaign and speeches like this the race card is now crashing and burning.
The day voters stop loaning on the race card is doomsday for the democratic party.

Like this:

Today the AP released yet another poll declaring that the Republicans are in trouble and the public doesn’t believe that Medicare and Social Security the cuts are not necessary

They’re not buying it. Most Americans say they don’t believe Medicare has to be cut to balance the federal budget, and ditto for Social Security, a new poll shows.

The Associated Press-GfK poll suggests that arguments for overhauling the massive benefit programs to pare government debt have failed to sway the public. The debate is unlikely to be resolved before next year’s elections for president and Congress.

And in this same poll the president has a 63% of those responding with a favorable opinion of him. Sounds pretty ominous for the GOP doesn’t it?

Unfortunately for those who actually like to be informed when reading what is supposed to be a news story you have to go deep into the AP numbers (not included in the story) to discover that the AP polled almost 2 democrats for every 1 republican(35% vs 18%). That’s not a poll that’s Psy-ops!

So lets ask the question: In a poll where the ratio of republicans to democrats are 2-1 how would you expect President Obama to do?

While you’re considering lets ponder something else: Including leaners Republicans made up 29% of this poll. That being the case if I’m the White House I’d think I’d be worried with 52% of respondents thinking the country is going in the wrong direction, wouldn’t you? With 29% of a sample being Republicans and 39% percent of the people asked disproving of the president that’s an awful lot of non-republicans disapproving isn’t it?

And with a sample at best a 3-2 democratic ratio and at worst a 2-1 we should expect democrats in this poll over republicans by at least a 60-67% shouldn’t we? Yet in this poll less than half the respondents trust democrats to manage the Deficit, Taxes, the Economy or protecting the country.

And with those same advantages what are the Trust numbers over 50% for dems in the poll? Social Security and creating Jobs 52%,Healthcare 53%, Medicare 54%.

If this is the best Democrats can do with a 2-1 or a 3-2 margin in polling what will they do in an actual election when the proportions will not be so favorable? Cripes George Bush has a 50% favorable rating in this poll!

If the MSM has to skew poll samples this badly to get the results they need, how confident must they be?

So when the MSM throws this poll in your face as part of their Psy-ops campaign there is only one answer:

Posts navigation

Listen to your Granny

Food Glorious Food

Find Discounts at the Stores you Love

Bloggers Prayer

Oh God, you who gave free will to your creation, bless those who use that precious gift to blog.

May we though this gift of freedom of expression enlighten, entertain and inform our readers, and we ask particular blessing for those who bring your word across the net, that they may faithfully execute your command to make disciples of all nations.